Risk Management: Biosecurity and the Future of the Apiculture Industry

Similar documents
Figure 1. The layers of New Zealand s biosecurity system and the scope of the GIA

THE NEEDS OF DEPENDANT POLLINATION INDUSTRIES

Pollination Australia

Biosecurity implementation to strengthen Australia's honey bee and pollination responsive industries

Overseas Market Access Requirements Notification - Animal Products Act 1999

Bee Diseases, Health Risks & their Management in Africa. Mike Allsopp ARC-PPRI, Stellenbosch South Africa

MANAGING RISKS IN WORLD TRADE IN BEES AND BEE PRODUCTS

Briefing to Incoming Ministers

The New Zealand Biosecurity System and how it operates

New Zealand Beekeeping Incorporated I Postal: c/- RD 1, Ashburton 7771 I Phone:

Update August Honeybee and Pollination Security CRC Bid Development

Biosecurity Code of Practice

BIOSECURITY AND THE DRIED FRUITS INDUSTRY

Bee Diseases Pests and Parasites

POLICY ON TRADE UNION RECOGNITION AND FACILITIES AND TIME OFF FOR TRADE UNION REPRESENTATIVES

USDA Honey Bee Pests and Diseases Survey Project Plan for 2014

IMPORT HEALTH STANDARD FOR THE IMPORTATION INTO NEW ZEALAND OF HONEY AND PROPOLIS FROM PITCAIRN ISLAND

COMMODITY ACT & BIOSECURITY ACT LEVIES

Business Case. PUA12 Public Safety Training Package. Review and Development. Public Safety Industry Reference Committee

Teabepäeva korraldamist toetab Euroopa Liit Eesti mesindusprogrammi kaudu. Norwegian Beekeepers Association

Beekeeping in New Zealand

Health Sector Relationship Agreement. A tripartite framework for constructive engagement in the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Sector

SUBMISSION ON THE DRAFT MPI IMPORT HEALTH STANDARD FOR AIR CONTAINERS FROM ALL COUNTRIES

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO THE BEE DISEASES AND PESTS CONTROL (ENGLAND) ORDER No. 342

Senate Inquiry into the Future of Beekeeping and Pollination Industries in Australia

Global Health Cluster Interim Terms of Reference

The Use of Asian Honeybees for Sustainable Apiculture in Afghanistan Zabul ADT, MSG James Doten, July 10, Background

Memorandum of Understanding Between VNGOC and NYNGOC

Terms of Reference for Mind Committees

The Perfect Storm: Setting the Stage for this Year's Loss of Honey Bee Colonies. Marla Spivak University of Minnesota

Proposed General Export Requirements for Bee Products

THE AUSTRALIAN HONEY BEE INDUSTRY BIOSECURITY CODE OF PRACTICE A SUMMARY

Feedback sought from industry and stakeholders

National Level AN EVERYDAY GUIDE TO THE RMA SERIES 1.4

BEEKEEPING IN SWAZILAND

Bee Health & Pollination services: Recent advances, Achievements in the AU/icipe/EU partnership in Africa

CHARTER OF THE GLOBAL JUDICIAL INSTITUTE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

Healthy Bees. Protecting and improving the health of honey bees in England and Wales. March 2009

NHS HEALTH SCOTLAND PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT

Strategic Plan. Summary

AUSTRALIAN FREEDIVING ASSOCIATION. (A Company Limited by Guarantee) BY LAWS

DISEASE REPORTING USING ARIS2

Supply of and Demand for Pollination Hives In New Zealand

Plant Production Biosecurity Scheme Consultation Overview. PPBS Consultation Overview. Purpose of this Paper

Joint actions 2017: Frequently Asked Questions

Managing Workforce Change and Staff Reduction

Pacific Horticultural and Agricultural Market Access Program (PHAMA)

Board Charter Z Energy Limited

Careerforce Shareholder Pack

Bayer Bee Care Program The importance of pollinators in sustainable agriculture

HEALTHY BEES PLAN IMPLEMENTATION BRIEF

TRUST POLICY NORTH YORKSHIRE AND YORK PRIMARY CARE TRUST POLICY REF: RECOGNITION AGREEMENT

SUBMISSION ON THE MPI IMPORT HEALTH STANDARD: VEHICLES, MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT (VEHICLE-ALL) DATED DECEMBER 2017

Law 88 A Summary L.B.P.S.B. Support Document: School Board Strategic Plan Development 2010/School Center Success Plan Development 2010

Canada s Efforts Supporting Bee Health

Wales Animal Health and Welfare Framework. Achieving High Standards Together

A project to develop biosecurity system health monitoring and reporting

Species Survival Commission

Business Improvement District Policy

NATIONAL REPRESENTATION OF THE AUSTRALIAN GRASSFED BEEF INDUSTRY CONSULTATION PAPER: DRAFT FUNDING AND STRUCTURAL REFORM PROPOSAL

Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2016)

SOLIHULL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE

Overview of bee diseases and available treatment options

BILD AB Proposed Amalgamation of CHBA-Alberta and UDI Alberta

Making an unlawful termination claim: for state system employees. Information Kit. Advice Line or

NHS Lambeth Clinical Commissioning Group Constitution

REQUIREMENTS AND BACKGROUND NOTE FOR CHS ALLIANCE BOARD ELECTIONS 2018 (approved by Board )

USDA APHIS Honey Bee Pests and Diseases Survey Project Plan for 2016

The One Stop Shop Working in Practice

ITP: 310/2 Healthy livestock Safe food

Effective Institutions Platform (EIP): Governance Arrangements

A revised version of the QCA Code (the Revised Code ) was published in April 2018, based on the comply or explain principle.

Colony Collapse Disorder: Why is it so difficult to study?

Bee health in Europe- Facts & Figures. Dr. Konstantinos Kasiotis Benaki Phytopathological Institute Laboratory of Pesticides Toxicology

ITP: 304 GLOBAL Quality Infrastructure Development in Support of World Trade

ICAI VIEWS ON THE CONSULTATIVE PAPER

Response to Consultation on Governance Arrangements for the UPI: Key Criteria and Functions

DRAFT PROCEDURES FOR THE THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY

MARITIME OPERATOR SAFETY SYSTEM FEES

Métis Nation of Ontario Secretariat Act, 2015 Bill 153 Backgrounder and Frequently Asked Questions

EUROPEAN COMMISSION. Honeybee Health

Bee Surveillance Programmes, Bee Mortality and Risk Assessment. EMEA London Dec

Table of Contents. All relevant process documentation and updates are available on the Ministry of Health website:

Caritas Development Fund (CDF) - Manual Introduction to the Caritas Development Fund (CDF)

ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI LIMITED Registration No. 1944/017354/06 ( AGA or the Company ) REMUNERATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE

This Board Charter (Charter) is the foundation document which sets out the Board s role and responsibilities in

Grievance Procedure. for Support, Research, Teaching & Scholarship and Casual Staff

PROPOSALS FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF

National Biosecurity Capability Network. Biosecurity Response Operations: Team Member

Industry Engagement in Training Package Development. Discussion Paper Towards a Contestable Model

New South Wales Coalition of Aboriginal Peak Organisations MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

Farmers & Honeybees. A Farmer s Guide

Probation Period for New Employees Policy

Honey Bee Health Challenges

Healthy livestock Safe food

Pacific Horticultural and Agricultural Market Access Program (PHAMA)

Te Hunga Roia Maori o Aotearoa (Maori Law Society Inc.) SUBMISSION: Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill

THE NORTHERN SHENANDOAH VALLEY ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND FAMILIES BYLAWS

Guidance for reservoir managers on the management of controlled reservoirs Reservoirs (Scotland) Act Backwater reservoir SEPA

Salford Third Sector Consortium Welcome Pack

Transcription:

Risk Management: Biosecurity and the Future of the Apiculture Industry This brochure provides information that will help members of the apiculture industry make an informed decision about the future of honey bee health, biosecurity management, and the apiculture industry s positioning within the primary production sector. Apiculture New Zealand needs to achieve a mandate from registered beekeepers to advance the Government Industry Agreement (GIA). A survey link has been emailed out to all registered beekeepers with a few simple questions along with room for your feedback. If you require the survey in hard copy, please email info@apinz.org.nz or phone 04 471 6254. In this brochure we have strived to keep it easy to read and understand. We have provided factual information and all the necessary references to the appropriate websites where more detail about GIA may be researched. We are now seeking a mandate from beekeepers to support the apiculture industry to become a signatory to GIA. To ensure we have a mandate, we ask you to complete the survey (link at end of brochure) as to whether our industry should be part of the GIA. Most other primary industries have signed up to the GIA; there are currently 13 primary industry organisation signatories. Included in this brochure are answers to many key questions, such as: Why is biosecurity important? What is GIA? How does it work? What are the advantages for us? What will happen if we don t sign? How much will it cost? 1 P age

Why is biosecurity important? Biosecurity is a shared responsibility that benefits all New Zealanders. We all have to be aware of how important it is to work together responsibly to protect our borders from the threat of all types of incursions. Within our industry, the greatest incursion threats may well be microscopic in the form of viruses or spores. Honey can easily harbour the spores of European foulbrood (Melissococcus plutonius) or viruses such as Israeli acute paralysis virus, which are not currently present in New Zealand. This makes the biosecurity risk of imported bee products entering New Zealand a primary focus. The impact of their entry on our bee health (stock) would be devastating. Another scenario that would possibly be far more devastating for beekeepers would be the consequences of the small hive beetle (Aethina tumida) larvae arriving in New Zealand. This could happen as easily as a handful of larvae-infested earth jammed under a pallet. There are many threats from which we need to protect our bees. Some of these include the parasitic fly Braula coeca, the tracheal mite (Acarapis woodi), the Asian mite (Tropilaelaps clareae) and not forgetting the African and Africanised honeybees; the Cape honeybee (Apis mellifera capensis) and other exotic Apis species such as the Asian honeybee (Apis cerana). Because of the nature of our industry, we also need to be very aware of the threats from biosecurity incursions which do not affect us directly, but will affect hive movements and access. For example, think about an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease; we would not have access to our apiaries on affected farms. What future implications to our livelihoods and businesses could there be from response decisions made following incursions such as myrtle rust or a next land-based incursion incident? Fortunately, our country has a very strong biosecurity focus. The Ministry for Primary Industries represents the front line of protection. MPI s role is imperative to the continued safety of our bees from exotic threats. One mistake has the potential to seriously affect bee health, and therefore our businesses, through loss of bee product supply or closed market access; we simply cannot afford to take biosecurity threats lightly. So, what is GIA and how does it apply to apiculture? The GIA story started in 2003, when the government directed that a biosecurity strategy with a fresh approach was needed on how biosecurity is managed in New Zealand. A system of partnership relationships between primary industries and MPI was proposed with the objective of strengthening our biosecurity by utilising the expertise of both industry and government to mutual benefit. This proposal is now known as the GIA, and is covered in part 5A of the Biosecurity Act 1993. This partnership intention is now finally documented within an agreement described as the GIA Deed. This Deed is an agreement between government, through the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), and industry organisations that sign it. It establishes the basis for a 2 P age

transparent, consistent and equitable partnership to improve biosecurity readiness and response outcomes. The government's intention is to involve the primary sectors directly with a more collaborative approach to managing risk across the whole biosecurity network. All this does not just happen without support. Signatories to the Deed have appointed a Secretariat, whose role is to facilitate the implementation of the partnerships described in the Deed. The Secretariat is independent and acts in the interests of all those who are signatories, facilitates negotiations, and assists in the drafting of operational agreements, should industry determine this is of benefit. Once a primary industry organisation can confirm it has the support of its membership to join GIA, it may make an application to the Minister for Primary Industries to sign the GIA Deed. Joint decision making for response commences once the deed is signed. Joint decision making and cost sharing for readiness is covered in Operational Agreements. Signatories also have the entitlement to appoint one person to represent their industry on the Deed Governance Group (DGG). Signatories sit at the governance table, with a single vote, and are part of any decision-making process that the DGG may be involved in. GIA Executive Committee (GEC) Fruit Fly Council (SBC) Secretariat Operational Agreements (OAs) The solid lines represent formal lines of accountability, i.e. the Secretariat is accountable to the GEC, which in turn is accountable to the DGG. Note that this does not prevent the DGG from interacting directly with the Secretariat when it chooses to do so, but the solid lines represent the normal, everyday situation. Deed Governance Group (DGG) Brown Marmorated Stink Bug Council (SBC) Interim Livestock Council (SBC) Operational Agreements (OAs) Operational Agreements (OAs) OAs are accountable to their signatory partners, and where applicable, to the sector-body council (SBC) that includes their signatory partners. Dotted lines represent liaison and consultation relationships. So, although the DGG does not supervise the SBCs or OAs, its overall responsibility for GIA and the Deed means that two-way consultation between DGG and SBCs should occur. In practical terms, the overlapping membership of these bodies ensures this occurs. Want more information? Visit the GIA website at www.gia.org.nz Apiculture has contributed in the early days leading to the development of the GIA. Our industry was represented on the joint working group for the second draft version of the Deed in 2011 as well as for the final GIA deed in 2013. 3 Page

To date, 13 primary industries have become signatories to GIA. There are a number awaiting the Minister s approval or, like apiculture, which are working through the process of attaining that required mandate from their respective members. As part of this process, consideration must be given to other primary industries that depend on our bees for the pollination of their crops. As recognised beneficiaries, they also have a vested interest in maintaining the good health of our bees, and could potentially be a party to biosecurity response cost sharing, involving future apiculture operational agreements. These industries, our primary business partners, have an expectation that the apiculture industry will also 4 P age

become a signatory. There are many sensible reasons why we should sign up to the GIA: The apiculture industry has a huge investment to protect. The whole industry depends on the health of our bees. There are biosecurity risks that can detrimentally affect our bees; therefore we need to position ourselves so we are able to offer industry knowledge and expertise in any biosecurity decision-making process. We need to control our costs directly, not be at the whim of others. You would not ring a plumber to fix your computer, so why would we leave decisions that directly affect our livelihoods to others who may not have the depth of knowledge required? Clearly, it is up to us as an industry; the obligation rests with us to limit risk for the apiculture sector. We have a responsibility to sign the Deed and take our rightful seat at the GIA governance table. Achieving a mandate and signing up to GIA is a sensible first step. The GIA includes, for example: Minimum commitments: minimum commitments include securing appropriately skilled and committed people to engage in readiness and response activities, communication with industry membership, working with MPI on developing operational agreements, and generally keeping up to speed with biosecurity issues. All these industry costs need to become budgeted items for the apiculture industry, through the proposed signatory body, Apiculture New Zealand. Operational agreements: the nature of the incursion would determine if this would be covered under a previously approved operational agreement, or if an operational agreement will need to be agreed to as per section 6.3 of the Deed. Biosecurity levy: the mandate would include a zero-rated biosecurity levy that would be activated, if and only when, an incursion of a serious nature triggered a response requirement. Industry s views will be sought on how activities should be funded via an industry-wide survey. A core element in Apiculture New Zealand s Mission Statement is to deliver benefit to the New Zealand Apiculture Industry. The Apiculture New Zealand Board believes strongly that the Government Industry Agreement (GIA) is the correct pathway and direction required to protect the future of our industry in biosecurity matters. Industry needs to work through a consultation process to show that we do have an industry mandate to become a signatory to the GIA. If we achieve a mandate and become a signatory to the GIA, we will have specific rights and privileges that are not available to non-signatory industries. GIA provides a co-operative multi-industry approach, which, partnered with the New Zealand Government, means costs are shared between all benefiting industries, whether or not they are signatories. The other benefits of being a signatory include: 5 P age

Pre-public notification Discussion privilege Decision making Fiscal caps Operational agreements Pre-public notification When a biosecurity incursion occurs that is not of public health risk, MPI is obligated to notify industry as the emerging risk is identified, whether already in New Zealand, or off shore (GIA Deed sections 3.1.1.d, 3.2.2.b, and 6.3.1). Knowledge about a risk at the preborder stage is invaluable, as it allows early intervention where possible and an ability to prepare, in advance, a response plan. This can mean the difference to an industry s survival. Discussion privilege At the time of incursion notification, the affected GIA signatories jointly decide whether to initiate a response. The signatories have the privilege to have their say during response discussions. This privilege is a voice to air industry concerns about the incursion effects, concerns about other industry/government proposed responses to the incursion, or to put forward an industry proposal for a response. Signatories also have the privilege to begin discussion for readiness against any potential biosecurity threat to this industry. Decision making Once a party signs the GIA Deed, it shares decision-making rights for any response to any incursion that affects its members. How these decision rights work in practice would be set out in operational agreements (OA) that signatories only commit to once they agree to the OA. Each signatory also has a critical role in the overall governance of the GIA Partnership with a seat on the Governance Group which oversees the implementation of the Deed. Fiscal caps In preparation for a potential biosecurity incursion resulting in a response, signatory industries have the right to set the maximum financial commitment they are willing to invest. All industries affected by an incursion share up to a maximum of 50% of the response cost. The remaining cost is funded through MPI, which may take action to recover costs from all benefiting non-signatory industries. This cost-recovery outcome will be formalised mid- 2018. There is no fiscal cap set by government on costs to be recovered from benefiting non-signatories. As noted previously, non-signatories also have no rights to be included in discussions, votes, or response plans; their industry s future is not under their control. When a fiscal cap is reached, the signatory has the opportunity, should it so elect, to increase the fiscal cap or alternatively, to withdraw from the response and incur no further 6 P age

financial obligation. At that point, MPI may review its commitment to continue any response activities under the operational agreement. Cost sharing is based on pre-established agreements with other industries, where applicable, that are determined by impact, size and benefit. Therefore, a signatory is not bearing the full financial burden, nor are they burning through their fiscal cap quickly during an incursion response. Operational agreements Signatories can create agreements with other benefiting industries outlining readiness activities or high-level principles of how an incursion response is governed. The kiwifruit industry is a very good example of this, and more information about their operational agreements can be found here: www.kvh.org.nz/gia The GIA Deed provides for agreeing an Operational Agreement, after a response is initiated in the event an OA has not previously been agreed. It is ideal to have a sector operational agreement (SOA) in place prior to the occurrence of an incursion. The SOA allows signatories to engage in readiness and response activities. Signatories pre-agree cost-sharing arrangements before an incursion takes place. Additionally, the SOA allows the signatory to nominate non-signatory industries that would benefit from a response, ensuring that the non-signatory becomes financially responsible under MPI cost recovery. What this means, is that even if the apiculture industry decided to not become a signatory to GIA, as an industry, there would still be a responsibility to pay a share of any cost that directly or indirectly benefits apiculture. The apiculture industry would also have no input into any decisions being made by MPI and the other industry groups that have signed the GIA. Also, because no operational agreements would be in place, there would be no signed cost sharing agreements with other beneficiaries that could be in our favour. How much will GIA cost us? The costs related to GIA fall into four areas: 1. Getting the agreement of industry members to sign the Deed and presenting this in an application to the Minister for Primary Industries. 2. Meeting the minimum commitments outlined in section 3.2 of the Deed. 3. Funding the industry organisation s involvement in Deed governance processes, including our share of the costs of the GIA Secretariat after 1 January 2020. 4. As a Deed Signatory, an industry organisation makes a future commitment to pay its share for readiness and response activities agreed in any Operational Agreement signed with MPI. Cost sharing for biosecurity responses is targeted for mid-2018. The costs of GIA will be specific to the circumstances of each Signatory, depending how they choose to meet minimum commitments and any operational agreements they enter into. Should the industry proceed with becoming a signatory with Apiculture New Zealand as the representative body, the initial cost areas 1 3 with industry support, will be covered 7 P age

through membership fees payable to the Apiculture New Zealand body. Area 4 would be covered by a pre-agreed levy for response activities, and options to cover costs for readiness activities are asked as part of the consultation survey. As part of the survey, Apiculture New Zealand will be asking industry to outline what they would be willing to invest on a per hive (beekeeper) or per kg (processor) basis. This will provide an indication of where the industry fiscal cap should be set at, and what the industry feels is a reasonable levy aimed to respond to a biosecurity threat to our industry, as well as funding options for readiness activities. 8 P age

How do we sign the GIA? The industry must go through an application process and provide evidence to the Minister for Primary Industries of the following, as per section 100ZA of the Biosecurity Act 1993: 1. Legal entity: an eligible industry organisation needs to be a body corporate. 2. Sector representation: the industry organisation must be able to demonstrate it represents the interests of the sector it wishes to represent. 3. Funding arrangements: arrangements for meeting the organisation's minimum commitments and cost sharing commitments must be evident. 4. Consultation: the industry organisation needs to adequately consult the individuals they wish to represent. The consultation must explain and invite feedback on: a. The proposal that the organisation become a party to the GIA; and b. The way in which it is proposed that the sector's views will be represented by the organisation during joint decision-making under the GIA; and c. The arrangements proposed to fund the organisation s commitments under the GIA. 5. Sector feedback: the organisation must be able to show it has had due regard to the views of the sector that it received during consultation. The application should include a summary of the feedback received during consultation and how it was addressed. The Apiculture New Zealand Biosecurity and GIA Focus Group was formed to begin the GIA application process, and perform subsequent related tasks following a successful application. Industry consultation is our first step in this process, and we need to hear from you. Below is the link to an online survey that will ask you relevant questions that we need the industry to answer before we can move forward on an application. There is a section for comments, and we do ask that you provide us contact details so we can respond to any questions or concerns you have. If you require the survey in hard copy, please email info@apinz.org.nz or phone 04 471 6254. On behalf of the focus group, thank you in advance for taking the time to provide us industry feedback. Take the survey now: www.surveymonkey.com/r/apiculture-gia 9 P age